Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kumar Shakti Devi@ Seema vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 December, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:60089
1 MCRC-31732-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 3 rd OF DECEMBER, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 31732 of 2024
KUMARI SHAKTI DEVI @ SEEMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Prasanna Namdeo - Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Nalini Gurung - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
WITH
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 36954 of 2024
ARCHANA SAINI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Prasanna Namdeo - Advocate for the applicant.
Ms. Nalini Gurung - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
These are second applications filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 (Section 483 of BNSS, 2023) for grant of regular bail relating to FIR No.259/2023, dated 21.10.2023 registered at Police Station-Kotwali, Bhopal District-Bhopal (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 343, 323, 506, 367, 368, 370, Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 12-12-2024 11:09:59 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:60089 2 MCRC-31732-2024 371, 120-B, 511, 34 of IPC and Section 81 & 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Applicants are in detention since 28.10.2023.
2- First bail application of applicant Kumari Shakti Devi @ Seems was dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed vide order dated 13.05.2024 passed in M.Cr.C. No.12894 of 2024. First bail application of applicant Archana Saini was dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed vide order dated 22.07.2024 passed in M.Cr.C. No.20201 of 2024. 3- As per the prosecution story, on 21.10.2023 at around 09:54 pm, complainant Mukesh Adiwasi alongwith his wife appeared at Police Station-Kotwali, Bhopal and informed that he is a labour. Today i.e. on 21.10.2023 at around 07:00 am, he left his home for wages. In the evening at around 05:00 pm, his wife Laxmi Adiwasi informed on the mobile that she alongwith their four children viz. Kajal Adiwasi aged about 8 years, Sandeep Adiwasi aged about 4 years, Sona Adiwasi aged about 3 years and Dipawali Adiwasi aged about 1 year was sitting in the compound of Curfew Wali Mata Temple. At around 10:30 am, one unknown woman aged about 35-40 years wearing black colour Salwar Suit came and asked that she needs her daughters for Kanyabhoj and after Kanyabhoj, she will return her daughters. She handed over her daughters Kajal and Dipawali to that unknown lady. After sometime, she found that woman and her daughters missing from the temple. When despite frantic search, she could not trace her daughters, FIR was lodged Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 12-12-2024 11:09:59 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:60089 3 MCRC-31732-2024 about missing of her daughters; Kajal aged about 8 years having dark complexion and height about 3 feet, she is thin and is wearing a white colour frock and Dipawali aged about 1 year having dark complexion and is still feeding and is not able to walk. Missing persons report was registered. FIR for commission of offence under Section 363 of IPC was also registered.
4- In the course of investigation, Archana Saini, her juvenile daughter Akshara and Muskan Bano were identified as the perpetrators who had taken the children with them. The missing girl children were recovered on 24.10.2023 from possession of Archana Saini. Mobile phones were seized and from mobiles, chats, audio & video recording and photographs were recovered. Two frocks were also seized. In the course of investigation, it was found that Archana Saini alongwith co-accused persons had kidnapped aforesaid minor girls for sale to co-accused Kumari Shakti Devi @ Seema for some consideration and they are running a racket of child lifting and disposing of them. It was also found that communication/chats had taken place between Shakti Devi @ Seema and Archana Saini on their Whatsapp in which conversations were made for sale of Dipawali.
5- Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicants are in detention since 28.10.2023 i.e. more than a period of one year. They have not committed any offence. They are innocent. They have been falsely implicated. They have nothing to do with commission of offence.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 12-12-2024 11:09:59 AMNEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:60089 4 MCRC-31732-2024 It is contended that minor Kajal Adiwasi and her mother Laxmi Adiwasi have already been examined before the Trial Court and there are various omissions and contradictions in their evidence. They are untruthful witnesses. Learned counsel for the applicants has referred various paragraphs of the evidence of aforesaid two witnesses and on the basis of aforesaid pretext, prayer for grant of bail to the applicants has been sought for.
6- On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicants.
7- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available in the case diary.
8- As far as, the reliability of evidence of the witnesses recorded before the Trial court is concerned, same has to be taken into consideration by the trial Court at the time of appreciation of evidence. As per the law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2007) 11 SCC 195, High Court is not required to appreciate the evidence of the witnesses while considering the bail application, it is required only to see the prima facie case and material available on the record. Thus, contradictions, omissions and conflicting versions, if any, have to be considered by the Trial court and not by this Court.
9- On perusal of the material available in the case diary, it is apparent that accused Archana Saini has been duly identified by the minor child as Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 12-12-2024 11:09:59 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:60089 5 MCRC-31732-2024 one of the author of the crime. It is also worth mentioning that chats & conversations between Archana Saini and Kumari Shakti Devi @ Seema with respect to sell of the child is available and in spectrography test, their voice have matched. As case relates to lifting of minor child for sale purpose and there is material on record about involvement of the present applicants/accused in commission of offence.
10- Therefore, having taken into consideration all the facts & circumstances of the case including gravity of offence, but without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is not a fit case for grant of bail. Consequently, these bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., 1973 (Section 483 of BNSS, 2023) for grant of bail filed on behalf of applicants - Kumari Shakti Devi @ Seema and Archana Saini stand dismissed.
11- However, it cannot be overlooked that applicants are in jail for more than a period of one year and in this period, as per the status report received from the Trial Court, only two witnesses have been examined so far, therefore, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the pace of the trial and to conclude it expeditiously as early as possible.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE @shish Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 12-12-2024 11:09:59 AM